Originally posted by GorJess
the ability to go back in time. then i could save my bro. aww thats soo sweet.. your GorJess

GorJess

so what powers do you want any in particular?

SuperkatmanX

Originally posted by GorJess so what powers do you want any in particular?
wouldnt mind some x ray vision if you know what i mean

GorJess

*closes curtains* i will be hiding behind x-ray proof things

SuperkatmanX

Originally posted by GorJess *closes curtains* i will be hiding behind x-ray proof things lead

GorJess

my curtains could be made of lead ....

Da Pittman

To do anything that I want, Damn Straight

Shakyamunison

10,000 wishes.

Da Pittman

I still win, I don't have a limit

Genesis

Teleportation.

KidRock

A billion dollars

=Tired Hiker=

Originally posted by Genesis
Teleportation.

That would be awesome, because then you'd leave! hysterical

dadudemon

I'd wish for nothing as my wife is my wish come truuuuuue!

Honey? R U readin' dis? I love you.

Really, though, I'd wish for omnipotence without the side effects of certain powers.

Impediment

I'd wish for sick rapping skills then I could tell my story to the world about being a Southern boy with a speech impediment.

Mindship

What I always wish for (whenever sharing a wishbone or blowing out candles ): that my loved ones go through life relatively unscathed.

Barring that: psionics would be pretty cool. Not too much to make life boring; enough to right some wrongs in the world.

WhoopeeDee

Hmmm...maybe something like every day is Christmas! Nah! That would get play out pretty fast.

I dunno...I'm pretty comfortable with what I have.

leslieRK

right now i would wish to win a flip cam for this contest i just entered. my fav. singer LIGHTS is having this contest where you can win a signed Tomm Coker print, autographed stuff from her, or a flip cam and i really want that flip cam. ive been wanting one for a while but never have the money for it and since im going to NY next month i could really use it. but thats just me being selfish..i would wish for the power to heal.

Hewhoknowsall

I would wish for more wishes.

..doesn't this belong in the OT forum?

chomperx9

i wish i had xaviers powers

The Dark Cloud

For the global human population to never exceed 100 million. If I couldn't have that I'd wish for sex with the woman in my avatar.

Ryo 666

Originally posted by dadudemon
I'd wish for nothing as my wife is my wish come truuuuuue!

Honey? R U readin' dis? I love you.

Really, though, I'd wish for omnipotence without the side effects of certain powers.

Wasted attempt at getting laid. Unless you leave it up for her to read.

Raoul

Money. Lots of money.

Failing that, the ability to heal others.

Superman's powers? Nah, i'd get power hungry and just take over the world...

Genesis

Originally posted by =Tired Hiker=
That would be awesome, because then you'd leave! hysterical You should save your meaningless posts for the OTF. Bye.

Lord Lucien

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
For the global human population to never exceed 100 million. If I couldn't have that I'd wish for sex with the woman in my avatar. I'd wish for vast swaths of the world population to be instantly sterilized. Failing that I'd wish for sex with the woman in your avatar.

lil bitchiness

I'd wish for two things - Perfect health till the moment I die and absolute happiness.

Rogue Jedi

Immortality.

Genesis

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Immortality.

You don't have to wish for that. Just become a Christian.

Rogue Jedi

Originally posted by Genesis
You don't have to wish for that. Just become a Christian. Done, but you know what I mean.

Sadako of Girth

I wish to fully understand the mechanics of the universe.

Originally posted by Genesis
You don't have to wish for that. Just become a Christian.

Seriously though, immortality would suck.

A series of watching everyone you care about die, stuck being you forever, what if you hated yourself...? How could you amuse yourself when having done everything already so many times before...?
It'd be like life played on cheat mode and worst of all suicide wouldn't even be the option.

Those Highlander immortals were ok though, they could always be decapitated, if it grew stale.

Besides the concept of living forever even though youve already died is somewhat the oxymoron.
If you lived forever, you by definition couldnt have died in the first place.

dadudemon

Originally posted by Sadako of Girth
I wish to fully understand the mechanics of the universe.

Seriously though, immortality would suck.

A series of watching everyone you care about die, stuck being you forever, what if you hated yourself...? How could you amuse yourself when having done everything already so many times before...?
It'd be like life played on cheat mode and worst of all suicide wouldn't even be the option.

Those Highlander immortals were ok though, they could always be decapitated, if it grew stale.

Besides the concept of living forever even though youve already died is somewhat the oxymoron.
If you lived forever, you by definition couldnt have died in the first place.

On top of that, there's the problem of entropy. Eventually, an immortals protons would all break down due to entropy. They'd die, anyway. It really isn't immortality, but just living a really long effin' time.

Rogue Jedi

Wasn't a problem for Dorian Gray.

The Dark Cloud

Originally posted by Genesis
You don't have to wish for that. Just become a Christian.

dadudemon

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Wasn't a problem for Dorian Gray.

Dorian gray lived over 10x10^100 years?

jaden101

I'd wish that Hitler had won.

Rogue Jedi

Originally posted by dadudemon
Dorian gray lived over 10x10^100 years? No, but what are the odds of me pissing off a vampire and having her show me my painting?

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
I'd wish that Hitler had won.

Give me your reasons, other than the horrible genocide against Jews.

You could very well have good reasons, so I am open-minded.

Rogue Jedi

Didn't Hitler do great things for Germany? The economy and what not?

jaden101

Originally posted by dadudemon
Give me your reasons, other than the horrible genocide against Jews.

You could very well have good reasons, so I am open-minded.

The level of technological and scientific investment would be massive and we would be far more advanced now that we currently are.

I think that if the third reich had won then we would be wasting far less resources than we currently are.

Obviously anyone with half a brain would think that the extermination of the Jews and other ethnic groups is abhorrent but the elimination of severely disabled people at birth would save a massive amount of resources.

People might think that sounds barbaric but bear in mind that one of the pioneering, advanced and democratic (for the time) civilisations ever in history also implemented that policy. The Spartans.

Controversial opinion?...Yes. Will I get abuse for voicing it?...Probably. Does it have validity?...Definitely.

lil bitchiness

Originally posted by dadudemon
Give me your reasons, other than the horrible genocide against Jews.

You could very well have good reasons, so I am open-minded.

It wasn't just Jews that were killed in great numbers during WWII.

Genesis

However, they were killed in the greatest numbers.

jaden101

Originally posted by Genesis
However, they were killed in the greatest numbers.

In the camps perhaps. The Russians suffered far greater losses than all other countries combined.

They lost more troops invading Finland that the Allies did in the whole of the war.

Rogue Jedi

Originally posted by jaden101
The Russians suffered far greater losses than all other countries combined.
Never knew that, fun fact.

Genesis

Originally posted by jaden101
In the camps perhaps. The Russians suffered far greater losses than all other countries combined.

They lost more troops invading Finland that the Allies did in the whole of the war.

Really? That's quite interesting. I suppose Russia also had more numbers overall.

lil bitchiness

Originally posted by Genesis
However, they were killed in the greatest numbers. Originally posted by jaden101
In the camps perhaps. The Russians suffered far greater losses than all other countries combined.

They lost more troops invading Finland that the Allies did in the whole of the war.

What jaden said.

I don't think its a ''fun'' fact. It is actually well known fact that Russians lost more people than allies combined - well it is well known in European history books anyway.

Genesis

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
What jaden said.

I don't think its a ''fun'' fact. It is actually well known fact that Russians lost more people than allies combined - well it is well known in European history books anyway.

I always knew the Chinese lost a lot of people as well. I'd assume Russia would lose a lot considering the density of their population.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
It wasn't just Jews that were killed in great numbers during WWII.

Was a greater attempt at genocide comitted against another people during WWII?

Originally posted by jaden101
The level of technological and scientific investment would be massive and we would be far more advanced now that we currently are.

I think that if the third reich had won then we would be wasting far less resources than we currently are.

Obviously anyone with half a brain would think that the extermination of the Jews and other ethnic groups is abhorrent but the elimination of severely disabled people at birth would save a massive amount of resources.

People might think that sounds barbaric but bear in mind that one of the pioneering, advanced and democratic (for the time) civilisations ever in history also implemented that policy. The Spartans.

Controversial opinion?...Yes. Will I get abuse for voicing it?...Probably. Does it have validity?...Definitely.

Do you have evidence of this technology advancement? I could counter that idea with the technology plans from other nations.

And eugenics are definitely a way of improving the human race. I'm all for it, actually. Mandotory sterlization, with an iron fist rule, etc. NOT! lol

But I do like the idea of Eugenics...just a voluntary kind.

Also, just because the Spartans did it, doesn't mean it's okay. Just means it was okay among that group of people.

Lord Lucien

Originally posted by dadudemon
Also, just because the Spartans did it, doesn't mean it's okay. Just means it was okay among that group of people. And if the Germans won, it'd be okay amongst them. So it all works out in the end.

And I just read on Wikipedia that the Winter War cost the Russians some 80,000 dead. A lot less than the total British and American dead.

dadudemon

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
And if the Germans won, it'd be okay amongst them. So it all works out in the end.

No it doesn't. It is neither okay or not okay. It is all relative to cultural norms of the person observing.

Murder is universal among humans, so is it not being kosher. However, what constitutes murder...or the consequences of murder, is what varies among the people.

jaden101

The Heinkel He 108, The Messerschmitt Me 262...Both the beginning of jet technology, the V1 and V2 flying bombs...the beginning of rocket and intercontinental ballistic missle technology.

People such as Ludwig Prandtl, Wernher von Braun, Konrad Dannenberg, Wilhelm Raithel, Ernst Stuhlinger, Klaus Riedel, Carl Freidrich and many others were the scientists who went on to key roles in the US nuclear and space technological advancement. All of them were German and all of them were pivotal in the development of the German rocket programme and nuclear research programme.

There were 1500 German scientists who were to be forced to work for the UK in the aftermath of WW2 simply to stop them being forced to work for the Soviet Union as it was feared they would make the SU the most powerful military in the world.

Why I say what I do is because the Germans put a far greater emphasis on scientific development in the 1930's and 40's than any western country does today. Himmler was adamant that large sums of money would be put to scientific research. Unfortunately for the west, it ranks very low on the priorities scale unless it's something that can grab the headlines such as global warming research.

While the experiments done on living subjects were horrible, many scientists have attempted to use Nazi biology finding to further research in their own fields.

There's also the fact that way in which Nazi experiments were carried out has since been adapted to standard practice of peer review, seminar presentation and fundraising.

Here's a few stories about former Nazi scientists and what they went on to achieve for the allied countries.

And I just read on Wikipedia that the Winter War cost the Russians some 80,000 dead. A lot less than the total British and American dead.

You many also notice that none of those figures have citations.

The Dark Cloud

Total Russian losses during WWII (including civilians) were somewhere between 20 and 30 million, by far the highest of any single country. What is often neglected however is almost half of them were killed by other Russians.

The country that suffered the highest losses as a percentage of it's population was Poland.

I'm hella glad the Nazis lost the war, efficiency be damned.

dadudemon

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
Total Russian losses during WWII (including civilians) were somewhere between 20 and 30 million, by far the highest of any single country. What is often neglected however is almost half of them were killed by other Russians. .

Almost half?

I didn't know that. I've never heard before.

Where did you get this information?

Originally posted by jaden101
The Heinkel He 108, The Messerschmitt Me 262...Both the beginning of jet technology, the V1 and V2 flying bombs...the beginning of rocket and intercontinental ballistic missle technology.

People such as Ludwig Prandtl, Wernher von Braun, Konrad Dannenberg, Wilhelm Raithel, Ernst Stuhlinger, Klaus Riedel, Carl Freidrich and many others were the scientists who went on to key roles in the US nuclear and space technological advancement. All of them were German and all of them were pivotal in the development of the German rocket programme and nuclear research programme.

There were 1500 German scientists who were to be forced to work for the UK in the aftermath of WW2 simply to stop them being forced to work for the Soviet Union as it was feared they would make the SU the most powerful military in the world.

Why I say what I do is because the Germans put a far greater emphasis on scientific development in the 1930's and 40's than any western country does today. Himmler was adamant that large sums of money would be put to scientific research. Unfortunately for the west, it ranks very low on the priorities scale unless it's something that can grab the headlines such as global warming research.

While the experiments done on living subjects were horrible, many scientists have attempted to use Nazi biology finding to further research in their own fields.

There's also the fact that way in which Nazi experiments were carried out has since been adapted to standard practice of peer review, seminar presentation and Fund-raising.

Here's a few stories about former Nazi scientists and what they went on to achieve for the allied countries.

Fact: The WWII German Scientists did create the beginnings of the Jet Engine. On top of that, it was developed in other countries at the same time as it was in Germany. Also, a British Engineer is also credited, along with a German engineer, for the independent development of the jet engine.

Myth: The Germans invented rockets and set the groundwork for rockets in space travel.

Fact: Konstantin Tsiolkovsky quickly followed by Robert Goddard. The end. If you want to take it further, it was the Russians who made the most progress, pre-WWII on rocket technology.

I'll give you ICBM's, though. But it's still an extension of work done by other nations...then Germans did it...then other nations used those scientists.

Myth: Peer reviews, fund raising, and seminars were invented by the Nazis.

Fact: No they weren't. Fund-raising, though not exactly the same as Fund-raising for medical study, was probably best done by American president, Andrew Jackson. His group was credited for starting the whole fund raising craze for politics and by extension, science. However, it existed long before he did it. He just did it better.

Peer review existed LONG before WWII scientists used it.

Seminars...hmm...ever hear of a Socratic debate? You probably did in your philosophy class. Yeah, the idea of a seminar is far from new. I don't even think that Socrates "invented" the seminar type of discussion, either. I think it was around before him.

Do you have any other specific technologies from WWII Germany?

So far, we agree on ICBMs and the stealing of German scientists being important.

Nemesis X

I wish that whenever a new game gets released, that game will automatically appear in front of me and I'll never have to pay $60 for another one again. A gamer's dream.

jaden101

So you say it's a myth then go on to say it's not a myth. And yes i'm well aware of Whittle's contribution with the turbojet but Ohain designed the 1st self contained jet engine and powered the 1st all jet plane. My point that the Germans still plowed far more money and resources (and still would be doing if they had won) means that we'd be far more advanced in that technology than under our current system had the Reich's priorities still been the same today.

Konstantin Tsiolkovsky is rightly credited with working out the theoretical principles of interplanetary travel and the idea of hydrogen and oxygen as a fuel but you can hardly say he did anything of practical significance in terms of building technology. If we're playing at being as pedantic as we can then why not go back to ancient times and credit the Chinese with inventing gunpowder?

Strawman argument. I never said they invented them. I said their method of carrying them out has been pretty much standard practice since their method.

The fact remains. WW2 was a massive driving force behind technological advancement and German scientists were pivotal in that advancement both during and after the war. I believe that had the Nazis won then those same scientists would have been given far more resources than they did from the US, UK or other allies.

As horrible a thought as it is and as unethical as it is, the work of Josef Mengele, Karl Gebhardt and Fritz Fischer was pioneering in the development of drugs to combat disease. The fact that they conducted these experiments on living people, while it may be abhorrent, also sped up the research to a huge degree.

What they did is terrible. How they went about the research process and presenting their findings was very influential on modern day research methods. I'm not saying they invented it but they certainly standardized many of the ways it is reviewed and published.

Here's an interesting site about what I mean in terms of using Nazi research as a basis for further research.

http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/NaziMedEx.html

Yes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_Zuse

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_brothers

http://www.rense.com/general4/bac.htm

http://www.rense.com/general34/enhance.htm

German scientists also invented or further developed IR night vision technology, guided missiles, electronic computers, the electron microscope, atomic fission, data-processing technologies, pesticides, chemical and biological weapons such as Tabun and Sarin gas.

For public health reasons, the Nazis were the 1st to produce research into the links between smoking and lung cancer.

They pioneered research into treating hypothermia though their experiments on human subjects.

Microwave cooking was pioneered by Nazi scientists to feed the troops on the Russian front.

That's just some of the stuff they did and I still standby the point that if the Nazis had won then more money would have been put into furthering those pieces of research.

You should definitely read that jlaw website though. Very interesting stuff.

jaden101

Oh...And after WW2...some 300,000 patents were effectively stolen from German scientists by the west.

That's a lot of inventions.

Lord Lucien

Originally posted by dadudemon
No it doesn't. It is neither okay or not okay. It is all relative to cultural norms of the person observing. I forgot how literal and humorless the GD forum was. Ah well, que sera.

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
So you say it's a myth then go on to say it's not a myth.

A Myth is not always false, though. You're attaching a negative connotation to it that it doesn't deserve.

Originally posted by jaden101
And yes i'm well aware of Whittle's contribution with the turbojet but Ohain designed the 1st self contained jet engine and powered the 1st all jet plane. My point that the Germans still plowed far more money and resources (and still would be doing if they had won) means that we'd be far more advanced in that technology than under our current system had the Reich's priorities still been the same today.

I don't see that and your claim is yet to be substantiated. It's not that I don't believe, it's just that I don't have your evidence.

What about numbers? Percentage of GDP invested in scientific development, etc. This is the stuff I need.

Originally posted by jaden101
Konstantin Tsiolkovsky is rightly credited with working out the theoretical principles of interplanetary travel and the idea of hydrogen and oxygen as a fuel but you can hardly say he did anything of practical significance in terms of building technology. If we're playing at being as pedantic as we can then why not go back to ancient times and credit the Chinese with inventing gunpowder?

To some physicists, Tsiolkovsky is the father of modern rocket science. (Goddard is usually the name that comes up, though.)

Did the Germans use recipes and instructions from "ancient" Chinese texts to make V-2 rockets? Nope. Did they use math from Tsiolkovsky as well as chemical ideas in a directly practical way? Sure did. And therein lies the reasoning.

Also, you're totally forgetting about my mention of Goddard...who actually experimented with rockets which set the groundwork for the V-1 and 2 rockets.

Originally posted by jaden101
Strawman argument. I never said they invented them. I said their method of carrying them out has been pretty much standard practice since their method.

Non sequitor fallacy. Your post was a justification for why we would be far more technologically more advanced than we are now. All items discussed were already widely used in other nations and before WWII Germany.

In other words, you logic does not follow. You didn't justify a reason why

Also, I never said you claimed that they invented them, either. I simply contradicted the notion that it was original to Germany or was even "spearheaded" by WWII Germany.

Originally posted by jaden101
The fact remains. WW2 was a massive driving force behind technological advancement and German scientists were pivotal in that advancement both during and after the war. I believe that had the Nazis won then those same scientists would have been given far more resources than they did from the US, UK or other allies.

The actual fact is, technology was being developed in other countries independently, that were comparable to Germany's. Do you have any groundbreaking technology examples from Germany or is it all recycled ideas from previous greats? This is the stuff I'm looking for. Original, genuine, innovation.

Originally posted by jaden101
As horrible a thought as it is and as unethical as it is, the work of Josef Mengele, Karl Gebhardt and Fritz Fischer was pioneering in the development of drugs to combat disease. The fact that they conducted these experiments on living people, while it may be abhorrent, also sped up the research to a huge degree.

I disagree that they were pioneers. Sure, they did some innovative stuff, but pharmacology had already been established in the modern world. The FDA actually came into existence in 1906, many years before those German scientists would do their work. The FDA was preceded by a couple of agencies before that, as well.

Also, WTF did Gebhardt do? I thought he just killed a bunch of women. My history books only taught that he was an absurd sadist that got killed after the conclusions of the Doctors' Trial.

Also, what did Fischer do? Again, only knowledge I have of him is his being a virtual no-name from the Doctors' Trial.

I see nothing revolutionary about any of the work they were doing.

Mengele is pretty much the only one of significance that you mentioned. However, his actual contributions to medical science are questionable. Don't you agree? I mean...what did he really contribute? What was "discovered" of note from his experiments?...or obsession with twins?

Originally posted by jaden101
What they did is terrible. How they went about the research process and presenting their findings was very influential on modern day research methods. I'm not saying they invented it but they certainly standardized many of the ways it is reviewed and published.

Like what? I don't know of any medical methods that they pioneered off the top of my head. I do recall that something came from those camps, but I cannot recall anything at the moment. I need something more specific.

And, I disagree, on a factual level, that the WWII German medical "experts" standardized jack shit in the way things are reviewed. The peer review process was already widely used before WWII.

Originally posted by jaden101
Here's an interesting site about what I mean in terms of using Nazi research as a basis for further research.

http://www.jlaw.com/Articles/NaziMedEx.html

Do you know that this article contains a massive section condemning the Nazi "research" and cites several doctors who agree with that? Do you also know that there were problems with following a legitimate scientific method, at times? You do know that they also polluted the scientific terms with sadistic almost sarcastic meanings?

Basically, hypothermia is the only useful data from that article you posted.

I'm having a hard time recalling, still, anything that was legitimately useful. As the article concludes, that could be because the data hasn't been examined enough to be of use.

Originally posted by jaden101
Yes

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konrad_Zuse

I am not finding this particular invention to be revolutionary or even groundbreaking. However, it was innovative for its time, but was among other/similar computers around it's time.

I see your computer and raise you the ABC:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atanasoff%E2%80%93Berry_Computer

Originally posted by jaden101
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horten_brothers

I see your Horten Brothers and raise you the Northrop YB-35 and the XB-36.

Do you see what I mean now about stuff from WWII Germany having compliments from other nations?

Originally posted by jaden101
http://www.rense.com/general4/bac.htm

AHA! Here's one. But I see your bacteria and raise you Alexander Fleming. A Scottish scientist.

But, more to the point, where did they get the idea to search for a cure for this problem in the first place? That seems pedantic, but it really isn't. The idea that a disease could be cured through immunological techniques came from somewhere.

Here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_immunology

Originally posted by jaden101
http://www.rense.com/general34/enhance.htm

Using amphetamines, cocaine, and morphine for "medical" purposes was nothing new.

Where's the NEW stuff, man. Where's the good stuff. That hypothermia thing was an example of that. I want more of THAT stuff.

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
German scientists also invented or further developed IR night vision technology,

A friggin' American engineer invented that.

Originally posted by jaden101
guided missiles,

I'll give you this one, too, on the grounds that the gyroscope was invented by a German anyway. (Wasn't it Bohnenberger?)

Originally posted by jaden101
electronic computers,

mmm....

Meh.

That is questionable as more work occurred outside of Germany.

Originally posted by jaden101
the electron microscope,

How about no. The electron microscope predates the 3rd Reich. I believe it was 1930 or 31.

Originally posted by jaden101
atomic fission,

How about a major no, there. How about Ernet Rutherford. (One of my childhood heros. cry

Originally posted by jaden101
data-processing technologies,

No. That goes just as equally, if not more so, to the Americans with their ABC computer.

Originally posted by jaden101
pesticides, chemical and biological weapons such as Tabun and Sarin gas.

I'll give you all of the above, except for biological weapons. You can make a case for the Japanese, as well. And developing and using biological weapons was not new to the 3rd Reich.

Originally posted by jaden101
For public health reasons, the Nazis were the 1st to produce research into the links between smoking and lung cancer.

I'm giving you this one, 100%.

Originally posted by jaden101
They pioneered research into treating hypothermia though their experiments on human subjects.

Pioneered, they did not. They little information that could be gleaned was certainly useful. However, they did not pioneer hypothermia treatment.

Originally posted by jaden101
Microwave cooking was pioneered by Nazi scientists to feed the troops on the Russian front.

Dude...a friggin' American, again, invented the microwave.

Most certainly was not pioneered by the Germans.

Originally posted by jaden101
That's just some of the stuff they did and I still standby the point that if the Nazis had won then more money would have been put into furthering those pieces of research.

I still find it dubious that we would have very much more new technologies. Almost all of your technologies had roots or were literally developed somewhere else.

I'll give you one thing more: The Germans DID combine a few technologies in new ways....buuuut so did a lot of other places. In fact, the Americans did a SHIT load of new crap right after WWII that exceeded anything the 3rd Reich did.

The subsequent cold war was also full of brand new things from both Russia and the US. The Cold war gave us much more "useful" stuff.

Originally posted by jaden101
You should definitely read that jlaw website though. Very interesting stuff.

I read the whole thing. It is a very biased piece of writing. It was written by a layman, as well.

Symmetric Chaos

Originally posted by jaden101
The level of technological and scientific investment would be massive and we would be far more advanced now that we currently are.

I think that if the third reich had won then we would be wasting far less resources than we currently are.

Far more likely that the massive inefficiency of the Nazi regime would have totally destroyed the world economy within a decade setting us back tremendously.

dadudemon

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Far more likely that the massive inefficiency of the Nazi regime would have totally destroyed the world economy within a decade setting us back tremendously.

WTF?

I've never heard of this before. Hook me up with some sources. I'd love to read about it.

Rogue Jedi

****ing nihlists....****ing nazis.....

Symmetric Chaos

Originally posted by dadudemon
WTF?

I've never heard of this before. Hook me up with some sources. I'd love to read about it.

Well I don't know of an sources but it was always explained to me that because the Nazi regime (and fascist ideology in general) was founded on using war to sustain itself they could never have really won. Defeating the Allies would have forced them to keep expanding, taking the war further and further. Eventually for Hitler to "win" he would have to conquer the entire planet.

Once the entire world was conquered the system would collapse in on itself, though perhaps they might have sustained it for a few years more by building infrastructure. The Nazi's spent far more money than they were produced, only maintaining their economy by rhetoric and simple looting of their neighbors.

There's a short analysis of the flaws in the Nazi system.
http://www.alternatehistory.com/gateway/essays/NaziEconomy.html

lil bitchiness

Originally posted by dadudemon
Was a greater attempt at genocide comitted against another people during WWII?

Oh I don't know, over 5 million gypsies, homosexuals, communists, those with mental disease and whole lot of other civilians deemed not likable to Hitler.

Right, well lets then forget about all other non-Jewish civilians that died in WWII because well, we cannot all put them under the single umbrella of ethnicity or religion.

NOONE denies Jews were singled out, but they weren't the only one killed as I already stated.

SuperkatmanX

i change my wish, i wish for yous to stop talkin about nazis

Genesis

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Oh I don't know, over 5 million gypsies, homosexuals, communists, those with mental disease and whole lot of other civilians deemed not likable to Hitler.

Right, well lets then forget about all other non-Jewish civilians that died in WWII because well, we cannot all put them under the single umbrella of ethnicity or religion.

NOONE denies Jews were singled out, but they weren't the only one killed as I already stated.

This is true. I agree with most of your post. However, Hitler primarily hated Jews and his largest goal was to wipe them out entirely. He elaborates on his Antisemitism in "Mein Kampf."

jaden101

I believe you're thinking of William Spicer. His work was carried out in the 1950's if I recall correctly. Different type of technology altogether.

Predates the Reich being in power but not the Nazi party having large influence in German politics. Max Knol and Ernst Ruska were both supporters of the Nazi party and reciepients of numerous awards by them.

Again, we can be pedantic with regards to these things. You can attribute biological weapons to the middle age seiges when plague victims were catapulted over beseiged castle walls.

Not all bad then eh?

Sigmund Rascher actually had a hypothermia research lab at Dachau and Auschwitz. Although, to be fair, a lot of this data is now being rejected as scientifically unsound although this isn't the case with data from experiments following on from the Nazi experiments.

Are you referring to Percy Spencer? If so, that was 1946. The Germans were using the technology several years before under the name "radiomissor"

Using, in many cases, German scientists and captured German technology.

Not so. The Reich economy before and during the war was far more efficient and productive than it had been before or since. They appropriated technology from IBM to make them more efficient and were one of the 1st nations to implement large scale punch card technology and data storage to make them more efficient.

jaden101

Oh...and it's best to read things before you post. Like for example.

dadudemon

Jaden, you missed the bulk of my reply to you.

Check back a page.

Rogue Jedi

wow.

jaden101

jaden101

Who would've thought that a seemingly frivilous question like "what would you wish for if you had one wish?" would lead to this eh?

Grand-Moff-Gav

Who would have developed all of this wondrous technology after the Nazi's had wiped out the intellectuals completely, shut down the Universities and changed education to be based on Goebbels' propaganda ministry rather than research?

Also, with the Bormann vs Goering vs Himmler power struggle at the top who would have succeeded an ailing and frail Hitler? The War against Japan and the oncoming Civil War would have destroyed the third reich and her technology.

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
I believe you're thinking of William Spicer. His work was carried out in the 1950's if I recall correctly. Different type of technology altogether.

It was Percy Spicer.

And how about the first microwave being the radarange in 1947?

All I see is a bunch of informal sites and writers main reference to nazis microwaving their food on their assault against the Russians, but nothing legit.

That doesn't change the fact the even IF the Nazis were doing it first, the Americans discovered it independently of the Nazis.

Which it was labeled as in 1998...hardly the effort of the time. That's a bit misleading.

Originally posted by jaden101
Predates the Reich being in power but not the Nazi party having large influence in German politics. Max Knol and Ernst Ruska were both supporters of the Nazi party and reciepients of numerous awards by them.

Does not change the fact that they were NOT part of the Reich's "scientific" endeavors. You're reaching.

Originally posted by jaden101
Again, we can be pedantic with regards to these things. You can attribute biological weapons to the middle age seiges when plague victims were catapulted over beseiged castle walls.

But we cannot as they didn't know about microbiology. They knew people would get sick from the sick. They didn't fully understand it until the late 18th century, if I remember correctly.

Originally posted by jaden101
Not all bad then eh?

Mmhmm. I knew there was some good stuff. There's no way all of the discoveries came from America and the UK. Germany comes from a long line of "best in the world" philosophers and scientists. Surely SOMETHING awesome was spawned from the 3rd Reich...which was my logic in asking you.

Originally posted by jaden101
Sigmund Rascher actually had a hypothermia research lab at Dachau and Auschwitz. Although, to be fair, a lot of this data is now being rejected as scientifically unsound although this isn't the case with data from experiments following on from the Nazi experiments.

If they had taken a bit more of a scientific approach, the sadistic "experiments" it would be much more useful.

Originally posted by jaden101
Are you referring to Percy Spencer? If so, that was 1946. The Germans were using the technology several years before under the name "radiomissor"

Oh, so now his name is Percy?

AHA! lol

Okay. I found hits for Radiomissor. Sites came up that were a bit more credible.

Still, it doesn't change the fact that Americans developed it, independently from the 3rd Reich..and not very long at all, after the Nazis were doing it, either.

Originally posted by jaden101
Using, in many cases, German scientists and captured German technology.

You mean, in very few and rare cases. Not even fission can be credited to the 3rd Reich. It was an idea that started OUTSIDE of Germany before the 3rd Reich.

If anything, it was the 3rd Reich that used OTHERS ideas and expounded on them...and not the other way around. Of course, there were things, as you have factually proven, that they developed that no one else did....but a shit load of more unique and useful things were done outside the 3rd Reich, before, during, and especially after WWII.

jaden101

King Kandy

Originally posted by jaden101
One idea the Nazis did steal from the US...Eugenics...Oh the irony.

Actually the idea dates as far back as Plato.

dadudemon

jaden101

From the very 1st line of your link.

Yes. The 1st experiments with stealth technology.

You Nazi sympathizer, you.

Except for that huge bit about Himmler and the Ahnenerbe.

Post war only because the won. It's common knowlege that both the US and USSR's space rocket and ballistic missle technology was pressed on by German scientists from the Nazi regime. If the Nazis had won, they'd still be working for Germany.

As for figures. They are hard to come by for purely science but it should be noted that as a % of GDP, spending in Germany rose across the board from about 14.9% to 33.9% which is increased further because of an increased size of economy between 1929 and 1939. This is noted in the book "The Nazi economic recovery" by RJ Overy.

Couple this with Himmler's influence over policy and his stance toward science and what I previously mentioned about his Ahnenerbe institutes then it's easy to see what effect this would have on Germany.

Then, of course, there is the fact that post WW1 Germany was a shattered and ruined country and stayed that way pretty much until the Nazis rose to power. They used their money making sectors such as agriculture and heavy industry to fund their research into more technology.

I also thought it was crafty of Germany, post WW1 both before and after the rise of the Nazis, to circumvent many of the stipulation placed upon them by the allies in regards to military spending by doing it though civilian organisations...For example, they funding aerodynamic technological development by funding things such as glider clubs to stupidly high levels...and noone noticed

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
From the very 1st line of your link.

By their definition, it was not. That doesn't mean it wasn't programmable by another definition, which is still correct.

If the parameters can be changed, it is programmable. They could be changed as it was "adaptive" to the systems of equations. Therefore, it was programmable from a certain point of view.

Oops. Forgot about the rest.

Originally posted by jaden101
Yes. The 1st experiments with stealth technology.

Cool. However, they were generally disliked by the other aeronautical "leaders" in the 3rd Reich. They are lucky to do what they did.

Doesn't change the fact that they did awesome things during WWII under the 3rd Reich, though.

Originally posted by jaden101
You Nazi sympathizer, you.

I sympathize with some things...such as their poor conditions after WWI. They rose up for the right reasons, but did it the wrong way.

Oppression is oppression is oppression. Even if the oppressed become the much bigger villain in the end...it's still oppression.

Originally posted by jaden101
Except for that huge bit about Himmler and the Ahnenerbe.

What? Hardly significant.

We discovered far more about the Vikings little world trips than they did.

Originally posted by jaden101
Post war only because the won. It's common knowlege that both the US and USSR's space rocket and ballistic missle technology was pressed on by German scientists from the Nazi regime. If the Nazis had won, they'd still be working for Germany.

No, the biggest leaps in rocket technology came FROM Russia, prior to WWII.

Had the war never happened, we would have had space rockets sooner from Russia.

Originally posted by jaden101
As for figures. They are hard to come by for purely science but it should be noted that as a % of GDP, spending in Germany rose across the board from about 14.9% to 33.9% which is increased further because of an increased size of economy between 1929 and 1939. This is noted in the book "The Nazi economic recovery" by RJ Overy.

I'm still wanting something substantial from you to back up your claim.

Let me tell you where I'm coming from:

I would certainly like to bring that to the table and say that the 3rd Reich was a wonderful regime for science, in some sort of discussion or debate that could happen. These types of facts are fun. (Yes, that's right. I said FUN! and I meant it! FUN! As in, jovial, happy, etc.)

Originally posted by jaden101
Couple this with Himmler's influence over policy and his stance toward science and what I previously mentioned about his Ahnenerbe institutes then it's easy to see what effect this would have on Germany.

Then, of course, there is the fact that post WW1 Germany was a shattered and ruined country and stayed that way pretty much until the Nazis rose to power. They used their money making sectors such as agriculture and heavy industry to fund their research into more technology.

Himmler was an idiot who liked sparkly things and explosions.

He would have loved Transformers 2.

Originally posted by jaden101
I also thought it was crafty of Germany, post WW1 both before and after the rise of the Nazis, to circumvent many of the stipulation placed upon them by the allies in regards to military spending by doing it though civilian organisations...For example, they funding aerodynamic technological development by funding things such as glider clubs to stupidly high levels...and noone noticed

Very true. He also happened to be hugely influential as to what Reich money was spent on.

Well then there really was no hope for him.

Bardock42

Originally posted by dadudemon
On top of that, there's the problem of entropy. Eventually, an immortals protons would all break down due to entropy. They'd die, anyway. It really isn't immortality, but just living a really long effin' time.

Or even worse, they wouldn't.Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
No, but what are the odds of me pissing off a vampire and having her show me my painting?

Oh God, your knowledge of Dorian Gray comes solely from the godawful movie "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"

Symmetric Chaos

Originally posted by Bardock42
Oh God, your knowledge of Dorian Gray comes solely from the godawful movie "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"

Still better than "The Picture of Dorian Gray", which is just . . . just awful.

And it doesn't have any hard numbers to prove your point. Isn't it just mere speculation?

Surely there's something "hard" out there that gives us some numbers...even if it is almost like a meta-analysis.

Originally posted by jaden101
Very true. He also happened to be hugely influential as to what Reich money was spent on.

Originally posted by jaden101
Well then there really was no hope for him.

Sure there was. I liked T2. awesome

(Don't say it. )

dadudemon

Originally posted by Bardock42
Oh God, your knowledge of Dorian Gray comes solely from the godawful movie "The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen"

I gave that movie a 6 out of 10. It wasn't THAT bad.

I also say, quite often, "I'm waiting to be impressed."

jaden101

It's a standard textbook for Cambridge University students and has an extensive bibliography. Its figures are sound.

Saying nothing.

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
It's a standard textbook for Cambridge University students and has an extensive bibliography. Its figures are sound.

So, other than an increased amount of money being spent on government in general, do you have anything more specific to 3rd Reich SCIENCE investments? hmmmm?

I'll even figure up the inflation, myself. I just want numbers.

Originally posted by jaden101
Saying nothing.

It's okay...Sadako and others have given me plenty of trouble for my opinion on it.

Edit -
Also, I edited my post...not this one, silly...the one you quoted.

jaden101

As I said. Direct figures are hard to come by but extrapolation is obvious...If spending was up and scientific research was a priority then it stands to reason that scientific spending went up.

The basic fact is, though, that scientific research was a priority...Regardless of figures...It just isn't in the western world. Not just currently because of the economic problems but it always has been.

For example, this one was a rather big issue in the UK at the beginning of last year because it may have meant the UK pulling out of the LHC project.

There is noone in high office in the UK or the US that was so vehement about the funding of science as Himmler was in the Reich. Granted, he was an idiot who knew little about science himself. No different from most politicians in that regard though...But he did push science. In some aspects he was completely delusional though. Read Himmler's crusade to see just how much so.

Originally posted by jaden101
As I said. Direct figures are hard to come by but extrapolation is obvious...If spending was up and scientific research was a priority then it stands to reason that scientific spending went up.

But we need numbers or percentage's relative to GDP to even make a comparison to other current countries. If you're are to prove your point, you have to bring those numbers out.

Originally posted by jaden101
The basic fact is, though, that scientific research was a priority...Regardless of figures...It just isn't in the western world. Not just currently because of the economic problems but it always has been.

But, it is. Not a main priority, but new technologies are created all the time.

In fact, to your likely chagrin, more scientific discoveries are being made now, than ever before. You do know that scientific papers being published is increasing exponentially, over time, right?

Per person, far more science is being done than it was during WWII.

Originally posted by jaden101
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/science/sciencenews/3321852/Science-Funding-cuts-threaten-scientific-research.html

For example, this one was a rather big issue in the UK at the beginning of last year because it may have meant the UK pulling out of the LHC project.

This does nothing to prove your point, though.

Originally posted by jaden101
There is noone in high office in the UK or the US that was so vehement about the funding of science as Himmler was in the Reich. Granted, he was an idiot who knew little about science himself. No different from most politicians in that regard though...But he did push science. In some aspects he was completely delusional though. Read Himmler's crusade to see just how much so.

I won't waste my time. I already know he was a quack. No need to further that idea, right. A synopsis should suffice.

The Dark Cloud

Originally posted by dadudemon
.

Almost half?

I didn't know that. I've never heard before.

Where did you get this information?

I studied WWII very extensively during the late 70s thru the mid 80s. At the time it was a huge fascination for me. I've read numerous books on the subject, probably around 30 or so.

A few good ones are (though probably somewhat dated now)

"Hitler and Stalin, parallel lives" by Alan Bullock
"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, a history of Nazi Germany" by William Shirer.
"Justice at Nuremberg" by Robert Conot
"Beria, Stalins first Lieutenant" by Amy Knight

It's estimated that Stalin eliminated around 10 million of his own countrymen during WWII (and that's not counting the purges of the 30s) via the NKVD, the forerunner of the KGB

The Dark Cloud

Originally posted by Nemesis X
I wish that whenever a new game gets released, that game will automatically appear in front of me and I'll never have to pay $60 for another one again. A gamer's dream.

Sorry, I own Activision stock, so I hope your wish never comes true (at least the not paying part)

jaden101

Why? Is the fact that most leading scientists opinion is that nowhere near enough gets spent on science in the west not a valid enough reason?

True...A lot of which is the stereotypical mad inventor in their Garden shed. Quite safe to say that we'd be far more advanced if more was spent on it though.

True. And i'm all for science research for understanding of known mechanisms (As a huge amount of current science is based around) but it's not the same as science research for the creation of technology.

I've had the pleasure of learning under Professor David Bremner and Dr Ashok Adya. One is currently researching and publishing on new technologies and has patents to his name in forensics (a new method of detecting fingerprints on clothing) sonochemisty and green technology and water technologies. The other publishes findings on nanotechnology and AFM but doesn't actively advance the technology. He uses it to understand protein mechanisms and other biological mechanisms and chemical mechanisms. The focus under the Nazi regime would be under technological development. Invention.

If you're taking into consideration the massive amounts of papers being generated on the social sciences of psychology, sociology etc then I agree. I wont bother voicing my own opinion of that science though. Needless to say that I call my friends who studied forensic psychobiology and criminology as doing "mickey mouse science".

But hey...I'm a prick that way.

That science isn't a priority in the west like it was in Nazi Germany?...I think it does. In fact I know it does.

dadudemon

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
I studied WWII very extensively during the late 70s thru the mid 80s. At the time it was a huge fascination for me. I've read numerous books on the subject, probably around 30 or so.

A few good ones are (though probably somewhat dated now)

"Hitler and Stalin, parallel lives" by Alan Bullock
"The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, a history of Nazi Germany" by William Shirer.
"Justice at Nuremberg" by Robert Conot
"Beria, Stalins first Lieutenant" by Amy Knight

It's estimated that Stalin eliminated around 10 million of his own countrymen during WWII (and that's not counting the purges of the 30s) via the NKVD, the forerunner of the KGB

Cool.

Do you have something more tangible? Like a website?

I thought the internal numbers were closer to a million, but not 50%.

jaden101

Originally posted by dadudemon
Cool.

Do you have something more tangible? Like a website?

Websites are not substitutes for books...Never will be.

Symmetric Chaos

Originally posted by jaden101
True. And i'm all for science research for understanding of known mechanisms (As a huge amount of current science is based around) but it's not the same as science research for the creation of technology.

I've had the pleasure of learning under Professor David Bremner and Dr Ashok Adya. One is currently researching and publishing on new technologies and has patents to his name in forensics (a new method of detecting fingerprints on clothing) sonochemisty and green technology and water technologies. The other publishes findings on nanotechnology and AFM but doesn't actively advance the technology. He uses it to understand protein mechanisms and other biological mechanisms and chemical mechanisms. The focus under the Nazi regime would be under technological development. Invention.

I see a serious practical problem in moving technology forward without understanding the mechanisms behind it. Namely, you can't. Not reliably at least.

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
Why? Is the fact that most leading scientists opinion is that nowhere near enough gets spent on science in the west not a valid enough reason?

Certainly not when you haven't substantiated your claim.

You said: "The level of technological and scientific investment would be massive and we would be far more advanced now that we currently are."

In this particular case, you mean "massive" as a relative term: relative to the current investment.

But how relative? Actual amounts adjusted for inflation? Probably not, as that isn't as comparable. You probably meant as a function of GDP or total world GDP.

You need to substantiate that claim. You have not done so.

If you cannot, then it is mere unproven speculation that can be disproven.

Originally posted by jaden101
True...A lot of which is the stereotypical mad inventor in their Garden shed. Quite safe to say that we'd be far more advanced if more was spent on it though.

I agree. If more private money were spent on R&D, we'd be far more advanced.

Originally posted by jaden101
True. And i'm all for science research for understanding of known mechanisms (As a huge amount of current science is based around) but it's not the same as science research for the creation of technology.

The creation of new technologies is ALSO increasing at an exponential rate.

If you were right about the Nazis, then the exponential rate would be steeper.

Originally posted by jaden101
I've had the pleasure of learning under Professor David Bremner and Dr Ashok Adya. One is currently researching and publishing on new technologies and has patents to his name in forensics (a new method of detecting fingerprints on clothing) sonochemisty and green technology and water technologies. The other publishes findings on nanotechnology and AFM but doesn't actively advance the technology. He uses it to understand protein mechanisms and other biological mechanisms and chemical mechanisms. The focus under the Nazi regime would be under technological development. Invention.

Cool.

And, more invention in newer and ground breaking technologies are occuring now, per person, than ever before.

The Golden Age, imo, was right after WWII. More stuff or the groundwork for stuff came from 1945-1970.

Originally posted by jaden101
If you're taking into consideration the massive amounts of papers being generated on the social sciences of psychology, sociology etc then I agree. I wont bother voicing my own opinion of that science though. Needless to say that I call my friends who studied forensic psychobiology and criminology as doing "mickey mouse science".

But hey...I'm a prick that way.

No, I'm talking about all sciences.

Originally posted by jaden101
That science isn't a priority in the west like it was in Nazi Germany?...I think it does. In fact I know it does.

I disagree. Science is a higher priority in the West than it has ever been in all of history.

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
Websites are not substitutes for books...Never will be.

Since it's all going digital, I sure like it.

And, I find books to be approaching outdated.

Online magazines that have pages that flip is an example of what I'm talking about.

I need something tangible, not a name of a book that I can't verify.

Lemme' show you what I mean:

Naziz spent far less money on science and military, as a function of GDP, than Germany does now. It can be found in:

The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich: A History of Nazi Germany" by William Shirer.

Edit: If I were at his house, then he could show me. In fact, if he wants to really get serious, he could scan or take a picture of the pages he refering to.

jaden101

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
I see a serious practical problem in moving technology forward without understanding the mechanisms behind it. Namely, you can't. Not reliably at least.

Not true at all. Discovery can be and is in many cases accidental. The thing with funding is that it allows more current technologies to be used or combined in different ways to make new technology.

An example is that in my hometown there are many companies who specialise in high volume screening of drugs to fight disease. They can only do this through high levels of funding. Most of the time it results in nothing but occasionally results in the testing of a drug against a certain disease that works and would most likely not have been discovered any other way. At that point there is no understanding of the mechanism. It's from that point on that they investigate that.

The advantage of higher funding is that it makes these "accidents" more likely through allowing far more testing.

Obviously knowledge comes into effect and can allow you to discount certain lines of investigation.

jaden101

Your skepticism is not a determining factor in whether something is true or not though.

Skepticism is healthy but if the the proof you require is in books and I give you those books (which i've given you 2 already) and you say "No doesn't count because I can't read it", it doesn't mean I haven't given you proof.

Current German spending on military is 1.1% by GDP in 2009 (in 2003 it was 1.45%...Under the Nazis it was 8.1%

For me, that would involve buying a scanner...Feel free to cover the costs if of that if you want to...I can't promise I wont spend it on the lager you stole from me though.

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
Your skepticism is not a determining factor in whether something is true or not though.

It is when you're trying to prove it to me.

Originally posted by jaden101
Skepticism is healthy but if the the proof you require is in books and I give you those books (which i've given you 2 already) and you say "No doesn't count because I can't read it", it doesn't mean I haven't given you proof.

That's true and it's not.

Like I just showed you, I can make any claim and put a book's name down with the author.

Do you blame me, though? I should be as skeptical as possible when someone makes a claim that seems like it isn't true.

Originally posted by jaden101
Current German spending on military is 1.1% by GDP in 2009 (in 2003 it was 1.45%...Under the Nazis it was 8.1%

URL doesn't work and that doesn't answer the question I posed to you after you made your claim.

And if that's your evidence, then the US has them beat by FAR.

The US spent 37% of GDP on military during WWII.

http://www.carlisle.army.mil/usawc/Parameters/08autumn/sharp.pdf

Going by your logic, aren't you glad the Allies won the war?

Originally posted by jaden101
and the book and mentioned earlier.

For me, that would involve buying a scanner...Feel free to cover the costs if of that if you want to...I can't promise I wont spend it on the lager you stole from me though.

You old man. I have two scanners and recently threw away an old one. Actually the two I have now are cheap multi-function printers.

Besides, a digital camera is all he needs. Much faster than a scanner.

jaden101

Since when has military expenditure equalled scientific research spending?

In fact the book name I gave you makes a point of showing a huge distinction between them.

Bardock42

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
Still better than "The Picture of Dorian Gray", which is just . . . just awful. Haven't seen the movie.

Mindship

I wish for this thread to get back on topic...

Shakyamunison

Originally posted by Mindship
I wish for this thread to get back on topic...

Be real.

dadudemon

Originally posted by jaden101
Since when has military expenditure equalled scientific research spending?

In fact the book name I gave you makes a point of showing a huge distinction between them.

Since when you cited that as a source to prove your point.

dadudemon

Originally posted by Mindship
I wish for this thread to get back on topic...

Strangely, it is on topic. Jaden is justifying his wish.

botankus

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
For the global human population to never exceed 100 million.

This may sound a bit selfish because everyone reading this would die, but I wish for the same thing except my number would be 100. Not 100 million, but 100. And my choice.

Mindship

Originally posted by dadudemon
Strangely, it is on topic. Jaden is justifying his wish. I wish to be less dense so as not to waste former wishes.

Symmetric Chaos

Originally posted by botankus
This may sound a bit selfish because everyone reading this would die, but I wish for the same thing except my number would be 100. Not 100 million, but 100. And my choice.

So you would wipe out humanity completely?

The Dark Cloud

Originally posted by dadudemon
Cool.

Do you have something more tangible? Like a website?

I thought the internal numbers were closer to a million, but not 50%. .

I have not followed the subject closely in recent years so no. My info on this matter comes from books and documentaries. But before about 15 years ago I was into this subject extensively. Please remember though. Most history is subjective. It's written by one of at least two sides. The older history is the harder it is to verify it's authenticity. The Nazis did keep meticulous documents, but much of what happened on the Eastern front will forever be lost to history.

jaden101

Originally posted by dadudemon
Strangely, it is on topic. Jaden is justifying his wish.

Even if it was off-topic...It's been a good debate. Something sadly lacking on KMC these days.

botankus

Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
So you would wipe out humanity completely?
I'm thinking 99 gay guys and 1 chick, so yes.

Originally posted by Mindship
I wish to be less dense so as not to waste former wishes.

The day you're dense is the day I stop loving food.

Let's just hope I don't ever go through Chemo so my point remains a compliment.

Originally posted by The Dark Cloud
.

I have not followed the subject closely in recent years so no. My info on this matter comes from books and documentaries. But before about 15 years ago I was into this subject extensively. Please remember though. Most history is subjective. It's written by one of at least two sides. The older history is the harder it is to verify it's authenticity. The Nazis did keep meticulous documents, but much of what happened on the Eastern front will forever be lost to history.

You know, Jaden could actually have a much better point if more of those documents and "technologies" were saved. I hear from old people all the time that the Nazis discovered or were doing groundbreaking things, all the time. It could be mostly unsubstantiated myth, or it could be their GI buddies coming home telling their friends about some of the stuff they destroyed in the invasions.

I do not think Jaden is full of shit, or even remotely off base. On the same token, I also don't think you're lying when you said 10 million (50%) instead of the 1 million I learned in school and college.

Jaden, the only thing I'm not kosher with, thus far, is your claim that the 3rd Reich would have resulted in more technologies, faster. As of right now, I think it's the opposite. We have more technologies and faster due to the 3rd Reich falling.

Originally posted by jaden101
Even if it was off-topic...It's been a good debate. Something sadly lacking on KMC these days.

Hell yes. We could do with more discussion in the GDF. The OTF only goes so far before one gets tired of the light-hearted conversations. I must say that I learned a couple of things. I didn't know about the usefulness of the freezing tests. I always assumed, due to the strong anti-Nazi opinions I've been exposed to, that it was a useless experirment that only functioned as sadism.

Darth Jello

Right now I kinda wish these tornado sirens would shut the hell up.

Symmetric Chaos

GRANTED!

I'd wish for superspeed a la The Flash (Bart)

jaden101

Apparently a fair amount of stuff is still under closed and unused patents that were taken from Germany by the allies at the end of the war so a lot of documentation does exist but noone's allowed access or to further develop it.

I couldn't tell you which of the 300,000 or so patents taken were used or for what purposes but I presume it would be specific componets from rockets in the space race and things of that nature.

botankus

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Would you be one of the 99 gay guys?
Either that or get a sex change or not exist. Tough decision.

Rogue Jedi

An immune system like Wolverine.

Ms Chelle

To have the same shimmering power the character Cole had on Charmed.

SuperkatmanX

The Guyver Bio armour suit

Mead6245

oh, Invisibility

SuperkatmanX

Originally posted by Mead6245
oh, Invisibility but then how will people see you??

jinXed by JaNx

Invincibility would be nice but i think that would take the thrill out of life. There are many times i would wish for enlightenment or just an overall better understanding on life. Although, again, i think this knowledge would make the journey of life pointless. I'm not even sure, anymore, that there is a ONE truth. Wishing for an endless bank account also seems nice but the more i think about that i realize that with endless wealth my life would probably become materialistic. I think the one thing that i could wish for that wouldn't compromise the balance of life is truth in power. I truly believe that it would benefit everyone if those we entrust with power were forced to speak truth.

Barker

To make everyone happy.

Rogue Jedi

A big red shiny button that would enable me to change anything however I see fit, no limitations, every time I pressed it.